Life According to the Flesh or the Spirit?
by David Brown
An apparent increase of bullying of clergy by their ‘seniors’ may match more serious trends and challenge our thinking. Has our Church wandered from its foundations more than we commonly recognise? Although Jesus said to Peter, ‘I will build my Church….’. our Church seems determined to build itself, applying much effort and finance to do so. We strangely emphasise Church Growth rather than Kingdom Growth, questionable ‘Mission Action Planning’, and latterly the ‘Living in Love and Faith’ process being spread across our denomination.
Consequences of such attitudes proliferate, fostering a straining for success, an unhealthy ‘ambition’, unthinking definitions of ‘success’ and how this may be measured. Then, some leaders seem fond of ‘man-contrived’ diocesan or Lambeth ‘awards’ for ‘success’, maybe named after a Celtic saint from English Church history.
Does a misguided urge for success lie behind our emphasis on ‘Church Leadership’ in recent decades, able to feed man-centred religion—human techniques and a devotion to ‘top-down’ initiatives? We easily forget that Jesus’s human ministry was a public failure to a watching world, and neither did the apostles fare better.
Such appetites are discordant with that of Jesus and the apostles who did no significant planning or initiative-taking. The word ‘Plan’ and its variations relate in the gospels only to the evil manoeuvres of the High Priest, scribes and Pharisees. As Jesus testified, remarkably: “When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will know …. that I do nothing on my own authority but speak just as the Father taught me. And he who sent me is with me. He has not left me alone, for I always do the things that are pleasing to him.” (Jn 8.28,29). The Apostles, likewise, received guidance or instruction as they went along: (Acts 5.20); Peter & Cornelius (Acts 10). Surprisingly, Paul had no strategy to follow. Directed by the Holy Spirit (Acts 13) and thereafter driven by circumstances—out of synagogues, cities, shipwrecked several times, visions—his initiatives seemed minimal. Yet, the Kingdom grew wherever the apostles went. Planning never seemed part of it. I imagine the apostles would have found Mission Action Planning incomprehensible whilst following the ‘Jesus-lifestyle’.
They had no techniques beyond accepting circumstances and human encounters as God-permitted or God-intended. God’s reality was conveyed by their lifestyle and words they were given to use. His presence and fragrant love were palpable. Such occurrences and manifestations, promised by Jesus when He commissioned them, and assuredly valid still. Jesus’s reported prayer for you and me makes it clear, “I do not ask for these only, but also for those who will believe in me through their word, that they may all be one, just as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that you have sent me.” (John 17.20,21). God does it all. His, the initiative, ours the attentive obedience., Jesus stood among them after his resurrection saying, “Peace be with you.” The disciples were glad when they saw the Lord. Then Jesus said to them again, “Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, even so I am sending you.” And when he had said this, he breathed on them and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you withhold forgiveness from any, it is withheld.” (John 19.20-23).
Are we consciously sent today in the Spirit’s power, as Jesus was? Or have we replaced this approach with a jumble of doctrine, liturgy, human ideas and logic, and our idea of ‘good works’; none of which readily connect anyone to the living God? And what are we to make of Matthew 28.19: ‘Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit’? Doesn’t this make human initiatives central? I would suggest the New Testament accounts indicate that God is always the initiator, opening onlookers’ eyes and minds to the Jesus-like life on display before them in his people. The Church thus has the follow-up role of gathering such people together and forming them as disciples.
Furthermore, instead of depending on our intellects and decision-making in any significant way, Jesus’s High Priestly prayer in John 17 shows he wishes to convey through us the two realities of His glory and His unity (vs.20-24). These features are either palpable or absent. They cannot be contrived. His present reality can only be evinced in his Church by demonstration and display, not through words and wisdom.
Leadership training and emphases may thus be somewhat out of place in Kingdom life. They may be too closely aligned to gaining results by techniques. If an individual is a self-disciplined follower of ‘the Way’, having integrity, self-denial, trust in God to direct his path, ability to ‘read a landscape’ and to relate well with others—and filled with love though the Spirit, that is all that is needed in a leader. Leadership does not need training. Rather, it requires Spirit-led appointment of those God has prepared.
Managerialism is the consequence of those ‘imbalances’ already described—each destructive of godly relationships and feeding subtle appetites for ‘self-promotion’.
Is it not the case that if such themes (success/church growth/leadership etc) are evident, they will conspire to make bullying more and more probable? With mounting pressures to ‘succeed’—for leaders’ own satisfaction, advancement and to ensure financial viability, human ‘initiatives’ will increase steadily, as will pressure on their ‘coal-face’ clergy to demonstrate ‘ministerial effectiveness’—however this may be viewed. Felt pressures will increase, with bullying only a ‘whisker’ away. Leaders will only be likely to spot the dangers and respond well if they have discovered how to walk in the Spirit. Human wisdom and intellect are ineffectual here.
“In order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit. For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit set their minds on the things of the Spirit. For to set the mind on the flesh is death, but to set the mind on the Spirit is life and peace. For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God’s law; indeed, it cannot. Those who are in the flesh cannot please God.” (Rom 8.4-8)
It is refreshing to remind ourselves that God and Jesus are meant to be at the very centre of what we think and say and do. They rarely seem to get a mention.
Moreover, over the centuries and particularly so now, careerism has taken over, with servants scrabbling around for status in the endless poorly accountable hierarchy. Other causes, no doubt worthy in themselves, are given preference over the Great Commission, which seems to have been forgotten.
I think David Brown is right that bullying ensues. We are seeing a particular version online of E-battering. This is a rapid fire deluging of the space with reasonably articulate but sometimes incomprehensible words. Typically these contain errors and omissions, but efforts to clarify by others, or the moderator, are returned with a quadrupled volume of reply, drowning out all reasonable grace and careful thought. It is draining and designed to flatten “the opposition”. I find it so anyway.
Curiously in the secular world, for example in business, they are much clearer about their mission. And far less unaware of the bullying in their midst. In this respect we, in the Churches, would do well to learn from them.
Sadly, parish clergy who are bullied by their seniors are likely in turn to bully their staff members, volunteers and parishioners: Patterson, Matt, Evangelicals Now, September 2022: https://www.e-n.org.uk/2022/09/features/theres-an-unchecked-disease-in-our-churches-visionary-dreaming/f44fe/ [accessed 31/08/22].
A fascinating article Catherine, and one which will resonate with many readers here.
When you strip it back, much of the pressure to be a “success” as a church is to cover the cost of the significant overheads: the pastor salaries and church buildings. These weren’t really there in the early church. Paul was able to cover his own costs.
Steve – such overheads have surely existed ever since clergy began to be paid and church communities moved out of people’s houses into public buildings (4th century?). However, the article is describing (and denouncing) a modern phenomenon, which a friend of mine has characterised as “the MBA mentality invading yet another domain”.
There have always been overheads of course, but their scale is increasing at the same time as income is declining. Apologies for talking about money, but the rush to secular solutions (which don’t appear to be working) is as much as anything to be found behind the growth drives.
With seniority comes responsibility, and someone senior is trying to reverse the economics in each diocese.
The writings of Roland Allen have relevance to us today, especially his “Missionary Methods – St Paul’s or Ours?”. An SPG missionary in China 100+ years ago. Other books include “The Ministry of the Spirit” and “The Spontaneous Expansion of the Church”. Some key ideas he advocated were the cessation of stipendiary ministry and a move away from church buildings into people’s homes. Perhaps our confused CofE wil move in these directions?
All mission in the New Testament was Holy Spirit led: the anointing of the Spirit’s power, demonstrations of the Spirit and of power, the manifest presence of God, healing and deliverance, and life-transforming encounters with the risen Jesus was the norm.
Today, the lack of prayer – real, heart-seeking prayer, the lack of anointing on both worship and preaching, the low level of expectation that we meet truly, experientially with Jesus in worship, shows how low the spiritual temperature is. When we make the time secretly on our knees to seek after God, and then as we share His love with others, they too will know His presence as we carry that presence with us.
Mission Action plans, the top-down nonsense of bullying clergy to do the latest fad to show “we are busy” rather than to have the fruit of genuine real prayer manifesting in ministry exposes the emptiness of so much so-called church-ianity.
How serious are we about bringing people to knowing Christ – or have we lost our own way and are going through the motions without the reality of Jesus in our lives? Who do you know that “brings the presence of Jesus” with them? Church growth/kingdom growth flows out of the inspiring worship, the loving relationships, the passionate spirituality, the effective structures which release people to share Christ, the gift-centred ministries, needs-oriented evangelism, the holistic discipleship in small groups and the leadership which empowers others and gives them confidence (If you’ve never read about “Natural Church Growth” you should – eye-opening understanding of how churches grow – coupled with real Church Growth principles which are not the nonsense we get pushed from most bishops and dioceses – they like to ignore this material for some reason, although I think Coventry diocese uses it).
Thank you for the pointer!
https://coventry.anglican.org/about/our-diocese/growing-healthy-churches/natural-church-development/
if only all church leaders took this seriously we would be miles ahead: “is my church worth joining?” is a good question to ask: none is perfect, but what are we inviting people into? Is there a real welcome? What is the worship like? are folk invited to relationship with others or are they ignored by regulars who are more intent on keeping to their own cliques? what’s the quality of the relationships? I could go on and on – so few are prepared to examine the quality, and even fewer prepared to address the weaknesses: I did some work with NCD some years ago and worked with a small Pentecostal church for a season as they did their surveys to analyse what was good and what was not good. First survey “worship was not inspiring”; question – what was it that didn’t inspire – unpack the question..answer “toilets are dirty, children’s work is naff”. So, they got to work and cleaned the toilets, invested in the children’s work and 18 months later, doing survey again, “inspiring worship” was top. Doing the analysis and then addressing the weakness meant church grew…
Church leaders are all relatively sensitive and insecure, and we don’t like criticism. But when we embrace principles to address the areas of church life that are poor, church growth happens because healthy plants reproduce. Healthy churches make new disciples; sickly churches, like sickly plants, don’t. Address the health and growth will result – and real growth, not transfer growth (as too often happens with HTB church plants – sucking in people from other churches instead of engaging with unbelievers and helping them find Christ.
Thinking of bullying, we spent a couple of hours last week in one of our great cathedrals. We paid our fees to get in and I was impressed by the courtesy and knowledge of the volunteer guides.
I must say I loved the architecture, but struggled with the almost ubiquitous splattering of plaques to commemorate the largely wealthy dead. People seemed to be buried everywhere. I lost count of the chapels dedicated to this or that ancient reverend or royal, largely with a prominent tomb to go with it. All a bit creepy for me.
There was an act of worship going on in another chapel. The worshippers were shut behind a modern addition of glazing to the “windows”. You could here and see the vicar preaching. She sounded pretty good from the strands I could here. I’ve probably misattributed her rank by the way. We weren’t being encouraged to go in.
The place was a colossal museum, and not being a huge fan of such, I was rather impressed. There was an exquisite ancient library and interactive displays looking at a very ancient bible (in Latin) and skeletons from some of the burial trunks had been examined forensically. I was absorbed.
However there was no mention of God or Jesus. Or the Holy Spirit.
Most people were sat outside on the grass in groups eating lunch. We joined them with excellent coffee and cake from on of those vans.
To be fair there was a group of smartly dressed men giving out tracts with one “preaching” at us about where we went when we died. Their attire suggested Brethren perhaps, possibly JWs, we couldn’t be sure. I admired their courage, but their approaches were a bit creepy. God was being mentioned. Trouble is we weren’t sure which one, and from experience tried to avoid eye contact and engagement.
In one sense this huge costly-to-maintain edifice was at the centre of city life. But on the other hand the best place for church seemed to be outside of it.
Thanks David, good to see you here again.
I’m not so sure, though, that Paul didn’t use strategy in his missionary journeys. He generally went to ports and major centres of population, from where those converted would spread the gospel into the surrounding region and beyond. That’s an effective strategy.
He had ‘apprentices’, too: Mark, Timothy, Prisca and Aquila. Of the many disciples, both male and female, mentioned in Paul’s letters, it may be that some of those were also trainees. In a sense, they all were, since they learned faith and mission from him.
I agree, however, that Paul and the other apostles kept a weather eye out for how the Spirit was leading them. Perhaps the Spirit was leading them to develop effective strategies?
At any rate, their example of listening intently for the voice of the Spirit while using their intelligence and cultivating good, honest relationships, does seem very different from the management-driven approach many church leaders seem to use today.
Read Roland Allen’s definitive book ” Missionary methods – Paul’s or ours?” up to date even though written about 80 years ago
Thanks, I’m familiar with the book.
Thanks, Janet. I would simply suggest that the living God is the strategist, and those who ‘walk in the Spirit’ will receive the Father’s strategic promptings as they go along. I think God’s strategy emerged from circumstances, ‘chance’ meetings and conversations. I think they believed that God didn’t do ‘random’, that then–and now–such prompts/events have his foreknowledge and purpose embedded in them. Romans 8.28 seems to point this way, but I may be getting out of my depth!
And yes, Paul was ‘into’ making disciples, discipling those whom God brought to him.
I do agree that we all need to be sensitive to the voice of the Spirit. But, ‘you shall worship the Lord with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your mind, and with all your strength…’ God expects us to use our minds and our abilities to analyse and plan. And we know that Paul was a man of ‘great learning’, as was said in one of his trials.
As a parent, I expect my children (who are adult) to run their own lives and to make the most of what they have. But I welcome frequent calls to chat and just be together. I treasure their thoughts and ideas. Occasionally there will be much more difficult things to discuss than the planning of everyday life. But even then I pull back from telling them what to do. They must live their own lives and have the benefit of making manageable mistakes. I challenge and suggest alternatives. Much of my parenting has been hit or miss, but I don’t believe our Heavenly Father wants us to check in for agreement on when to make the tea, or go to the bathroom. He gave the command to subdue the world after all.
There are many routine things that need to be done in running a church, for example cleaning the toilets and feeding the poor. All these things are better carried out with efficient organisation rather than being left to the spiritual whims of a holy father up with the heaven-lies, but of little earthly use. Failure to plan in these and many other things is really a dereliction of duty.
As the early apostles got themselves together with looking after elderly widows, this pleased God I’m sure, and by their better closeness to Him they learnt more spiritual nuggets for the preaching they did. One couldn’t happen very well without the other.
I’m interested in David’s article, which reminds me a lot of the ideas flowing from Fountain Trust and the early charismatics, back in the 1970’s. Indeed, they in turn reflected Roland Allen’s ideas such as house churches, non stipeniary ministry (aka ‘every member ministry’) and a general call to simplicity, implicit trust in the Spirit’s leading and following the ‘New Testament pattern’ Confession time – yes, I believed in that back then and, to a great extent still do. Unfortunately time’s shown some of the weaknesses – the reinvention of the wheel being chief among them. Resistance to the changes demanded by new ideas inevitably led to fragmentation and disillusionment.
As the church grew over the centuries, it evolved and changed, partly of necessity, partly because of power politics; personally speaking, it isn’t feasible to turn the clock back to 67AD and start again; we live in a very different world. We need a new vision – we had one in the ’70’s, and to a great degree lost it, buried in personality cults and restrictive social legislation. When can we hope to see another? All we can do is wait upon God, and hope that next time his church will learn from the lessons of the past.
I agree. ‘Following the Spirit’s leading’ through charismatic leaders far too often led to manipulation and abuses of power. It’s so easy to mistake our own wishes and desires for the Spirit’s leading. I recall one of the elders of St. Michael-le-Belfrey saying, in about 1991, ‘Looking back over the last 25 years, we’ve been down an awful lot of dead end alleys.
We are dealing with a topic involving a vast range of possibilities and options; high strategy down to local but important tactics. I can only apologise where I am less than clear.
Kingdom growth occurs, I suggest, for one primary reason: the sheer contagious power of the divine presence in a grace-filled individual or community to a degree and fragrance that arouses attention and belief. It cannot be contrived or achieved by any technique – it is pure consequence and surely as valid today as in apostolic times. When this happens, it cannot be ‘captured’ by forming a new Trust, a new Church, training, a new style of worship or of charismatic leadership.
In apostolic times, I suggest, God was the initiator and the apostles were prompted by the Spirit to respond as God wished in their developing circumstances. I see no reason why it should be different today.
John 3.8 seems apposite
Hi David
YES, absolutely spot -on re Kingdom growth: and our part is to seek after Him in prayer – not say prayers, but pray prayers – “Lord send a revival, and let it begin in me” is a line from an old hymn – but there is no other place: what price are we prepared to pay to see a moving of the Holy Spirit? Every outpouring has been accompanied by earnest, passionate prayer – something of which some parts of the Church appear to know nothing. The Holy Spirit initiates people to pray, and as they seek Him, He begins a move – it always starts with Him.
Last night I came across this wisdom in Watchman Nee’s book “Changed into His Likeness” :
“What God’s hand does is right. Circumstances are His appointment for our good. They are calculated to undermine and weaken the specially strong points of our nature. It may not take him as much as twenty years to do this, or it may take longer. Yet God knows what He is doing. We see this clearly at the end of Jacob’s life. Earlier he had inspired little affection in anyone, for everyone had to serve his ends; yet at the last he became gentle and lovable.”
Quoting 1 Peter 1.6-7, he finishes: “There is nothing accidental in the life of the believer. It is all measured out to us. We may not welcome the discipline, but it is designed in the end to make us partakers of His holiness.”
Watchman Nee, a Christian leader in China, founded 200 churches 1923-50.
Some survivors of child abuse may be able to accept this teaching, but many won’t of course. And for some their horrendous treatment at the hands of evil, often priestly adults will mean they have their faith foreclosed for them. Is God working in this somehow? I’m not sure whether this idea is always terribly helpful for them.
This may be a good message for those who have led sheltered lives. Think of its effect, however, on the families of those murdered in Canada; the parents of children shot in Uvalde Primary School, or the 9year old shot in her own front hall; or on those of us raped and abused as children. Nee makes God directly responsible for all these evil acts, as well as for many other tragedies.
It’s hard enough for people who are victims of horrendous events like these to maintain faith in a loving God, without being told God deliberately inflicted evil on them as some kind of ‘discipline’. It makes God out to be a monster.
Yes, David. I’m not convinced that fatalism is a Christian concept. Nor that God is ok with sin. I’m of the “stuff happens” school, myself . But I would never deny that God can and does use bad things for good. Look what he did with the judicial murder of an innocent itinerant preacher!
I agree. God’s response to evil is wholly beyond our understanding. Many texts in Scripture need to be rightly handled; not catapulted at bruised people. And of course God’s timescales are quite different from ours. I was brutally treated by someone close to me, and my life deeply affected, decades ago yet now I see how God used it for good and I am able to thank Him for it.
I feel there are many accounts in Scripture that we ‘blank out’ at our peril. I don’t think any of the apostles died in their own beds, but look at the outcomes.